pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.11283 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · gr-qc

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape for the Laser Interferometer Lunar Antenna (LILA): Signal-to-Noise Calculations & Science Cases

Angelo Ricarte, Anjali Yelikar, Karan Jani, Ryan Nowicki, Tintin Nguyen

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 01:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE gr-qc
keywords gravitational wavesintermediate-mass black holeslunar interferometerblack hole binariessignal-to-noise ratioearly universeeccentricitystrong-field gravity
0
0 comments X

The pith

LILA can detect intermediate-mass black hole binaries from redshifts 20-30 with four years of observation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper performs signal-to-noise calculations showing that the proposed Lunar Interferometer LILA reaches deci-Hz frequencies and can observe IMBH binaries out to the earliest epochs of massive black hole formation. A four-year run would capture systems with total masses from hundreds to millions of solar masses, including intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals and events that retain measurable eccentricity. These detections would supply early warnings months to years before merger, enable strong-field gravity tests on high-SNR events, and complement ground-based detectors by extending the mass and redshift range of known black hole mergers.

Core claim

With an observational period of 4 years, LILA can extend its IMBH detection horizon to the very early Universe, directly probing the first population of massive black holes (z ∼ 20-30). LILA could also detect intermediate-mass-ratio inspiral systems with a total mass of ∼10^4−10^6 M⊙ and a mass ratio of ∼10−4−10−2, discover IMBH binaries months to years before merger with measurable eccentricity residuals, and observe high-SNR (≳100) events that enable strong-field tests of gravity while expanding the upper envelope of stellar-origin black holes to masses ≳250 M⊙.

What carries the argument

Signal-to-noise ratio calculations that fold the LILA sensitivity curve (taken from the prior proposal) with IMBH binary waveforms across a grid of masses, mass ratios, eccentricities, and redshifts up to z∼30.

If this is right

  • LILA supplies months-to-years advance notice of IMBH mergers for multi-messenger and multi-band follow-up campaigns.
  • High-SNR events enable direct strong-field tests of general relativity using the inspiral and ringdown phases.
  • Eccentricity measurements distinguish formation channels that retain orbital eccentricity versus those that circularize.
  • Detection of IMBHs at z∼20-30 constrains the seed population and early growth of supermassive black holes.
  • LILA fills the gap between LIGO/Virgo stellar-mass detections and future space-based detectors by covering the pair-instability mass gap and light IMBH regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The ability to observe eccentric IMBH binaries at high redshift could test whether dynamical formation in dense early-universe clusters dominates over isolated binary evolution.
  • If LILA detects events with masses above the pair-instability gap, it would tighten limits on the maximum mass of stellar-origin black holes produced by single-star evolution.
  • Combining LILA's deci-Hz band with ground-based detectors would create a continuous multi-band gravitational-wave spectrum from stellar-mass to supermassive binaries.
  • Non-detection of high-redshift IMBHs after four years would require downward revision of assumed merger rates or upward revision of LILA's noise floor.

Load-bearing premise

The noise model, sensitivity curve, and antenna response of LILA are taken as given from the prior proposal without independent verification in this work, and the existence and merger rates of the targeted IMBH populations are assumed rather than derived.

What would settle it

Actual on-Moon measurements of LILA's noise spectrum after deployment that deviate significantly from the modeled sensitivity curve, or a four-year data set that contains no IMBH merger events above z=10 despite the assumed rates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.11283 by Angelo Ricarte, Anjali Yelikar, Karan Jani, Ryan Nowicki, Tintin Nguyen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A schematic diagram describing the GW spectrum with the corresponding detector types [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Characteristic strain evolution of equal-mass, non-spinning, circular black hole binary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Characteristic strain evolution of equal-mass, non-spinning black hole binary systems with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Detection horizon curves of LILA-Pioneer (left) and LILA-Horizon (right) instruments [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: SNR = 8 detection redshift contours, defined as the farthest redshift for a black hole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The cumulative SNR of equal-mass (top row) and intermediate-mass ratio (bottom row) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Detection horizon of LILA-Pioneer (left) and LILA-Horizon (right) with color contours [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Cumulative SNR (left) and sky localization error (right) as a function of time before merger [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: SNR = 8 detection horizon curves for LIGO A+ ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Laser Interferometer Lunar Antenna (LILA) is a proposed gravitational-wave project aiming to take full advantage of the Moon's environment to access the deci-Hz band and detect intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH) binaries of mass $\sim 10^2-10^6 \, M_{\odot}$ (arXiv:2508.11631). With an observational period of 4 years, LILA can extend its IMBH detection horizon to the very early Universe, directly probing the first population of massive black holes ($z \sim 20-30$). LILA could also detect intermediate-mass-ratio inspiral systems with a total mass of $\sim 10^4 - 10^6 \, M_{\odot}$ and a mass ratio of $\sim 10^{-4} - 10^{-2}$. LILA can discover IMBH binaries months to years before merger with measurable eccentricity residuals retained from their formation, providing crucial early warning for multi-messenger and multi-band follow-up. The high SNR ($\gtrsim 100$) events detectable with LILA would enable strong-field tests of gravity. With these capabilities, LILA will provide important insights into the formation and evolution of massive black holes, as well as the astrophysical environments and evolutionary pathways of black hole binaries. LILA will also complement current LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA detections of pair-instability mass gap events, hierarchical merger candidates, and light IMBH mergers, while expanding the upper envelope of discovered black holes with stellar origin to masses of $\gtrsim 250 \, M_{\odot}$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) calculations for the proposed Laser Interferometer Lunar Antenna (LILA) targeting intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH) binaries (∼10²–10⁶ M⊙) and intermediate-mass-ratio inspirals (IMRIs, total mass ∼10⁴–10⁶ M⊙, mass ratio ∼10^{-4}–10^{-2}). Using a 4-year observation period and sensitivity curves adopted from a prior LILA proposal, it claims detection horizons extending to z∼20–30, early warnings months to years before merger with retained eccentricity, high-SNR (≳100) events for strong-field gravity tests, and complementary science cases for black hole formation, evolution, and multi-messenger follow-up.

Significance. If the imported LILA noise model and antenna response hold, the results would meaningfully extend gravitational-wave reach into the deci-Hz band and the early universe, offering concrete, falsifiable predictions for IMBH detection rates and distances that complement LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA observations of pair-instability gap events. The forward-modeling approach provides specific science cases for multi-band early warnings and hierarchical merger studies.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 (LILA Instrument and Noise Model)] §2 (LILA Instrument and Noise Model): The SNR calculations and z∼20–30 horizon claims import the complete noise PSD, lunar seismic/thermal environment, and response function directly from arXiv:2508.11631 with no independent re-derivation, error budget, or sensitivity analysis to variations in moonquake or thermal noise amplitudes. This assumption is load-bearing for the central detection-horizon result; an upward revision in the noise floor would shrink the reachable redshift below the quoted range.
  2. [§4 (Detection Horizons and Rates)] §4 (Detection Horizons and Rates): The quoted IMBH and IMRI detection rates and early-warning times rest on assumed merger-rate densities and eccentricity distributions that are stated but not derived or varied within the manuscript; while rates affect event counts rather than the horizon distance itself, the lack of justification or parameter ranges undermines the quantitative science-case claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim of 'high SNR (≳100)' events would be clearer with a parenthetical note on the specific mass, distance, and SNR threshold definitions used to arrive at this figure.
  2. [§3 (SNR Formulas)] Figure captions and §3 (SNR Formulas): Several waveform or integration expressions are referenced but not written explicitly; adding the exact functional forms or citing the precise equations employed would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating the revisions we will make to strengthen the paper while remaining within its scope as an application of the established LILA noise model.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2 (LILA Instrument and Noise Model)] §2 (LILA Instrument and Noise Model): The SNR calculations and z∼20–30 horizon claims import the complete noise PSD, lunar seismic/thermal environment, and response function directly from arXiv:2508.11631 with no independent re-derivation, error budget, or sensitivity analysis to variations in moonquake or thermal noise amplitudes. This assumption is load-bearing for the central detection-horizon result; an upward revision in the noise floor would shrink the reachable redshift below the quoted range.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the noise PSD, lunar environment parameters, and response function are adopted directly from the companion LILA instrument proposal (arXiv:2508.11631), as the present work focuses on SNR calculations and science cases rather than instrument design. We agree that an explicit sensitivity analysis would improve robustness. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) quantifying how detection horizons at z∼20–30 respond to plausible variations in seismic and thermal noise amplitudes (e.g., factors of 0.5–2 relative to the baseline model), thereby providing an error budget without performing a full independent re-derivation of the lunar noise environment. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§4 (Detection Horizons and Rates)] §4 (Detection Horizons and Rates): The quoted IMBH and IMRI detection rates and early-warning times rest on assumed merger-rate densities and eccentricity distributions that are stated but not derived or varied within the manuscript; while rates affect event counts rather than the horizon distance itself, the lack of justification or parameter ranges undermines the quantitative science-case claims.

    Authors: We agree that the merger-rate densities and eccentricity distributions are taken from the literature and stated without additional derivation or variation in the current text. While these assumptions do not affect the quoted detection horizons (which depend only on SNR thresholds and the noise curve), they do influence the quantitative science-case statements regarding expected event numbers and early-warning statistics. In the revised §4 we will (i) cite the specific references and physical motivations for the adopted values, (ii) briefly justify the chosen ranges, and (iii) present results for a modest set of parameter variations (e.g., rate densities spanning an order of magnitude and eccentricity distributions consistent with formation channels) to illustrate the robustness of the multi-messenger and early-warning claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; detection horizons derived from forward SNR modeling on imported instrument parameters

full rationale

The paper conducts explicit signal-to-noise ratio calculations for IMBH binaries across mass and redshift ranges, integrating over a 4-year observation period to obtain detection horizons. The noise PSD, antenna response, and lunar environment model are adopted directly from the cited prior proposal (arXiv:2508.11631) without re-derivation here, but this is a standard use of external inputs rather than a reduction of the output to the input by construction. No self-definitional loops appear in the equations, no parameters are fitted to the target results and then relabeled as predictions, and the central claims about z~20-30 reach follow from the forward propagation of the adopted sensitivity under stated source assumptions. The self-citation is present and load-bearing for the instrument model but does not create a tautological chain, as the SNR computations and horizon estimates constitute independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the LILA sensitivity model published in arXiv:2508.11631 and on standard GR waveform templates; no new free parameters are introduced in the abstract itself.

free parameters (1)
  • LILA noise curve and response
    Taken directly from the referenced prior proposal without re-derivation here.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard general-relativity inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms for IMBH binaries
    Used to compute SNR and detection horizons.
  • domain assumption Astrophysical population of IMBHs exists at z~20-30 with merger rates sufficient for detection
    Required for the quoted science reach; not derived in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5612 in / 1405 out tokens · 40744 ms · 2026-05-13T01:30:09.546547+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

300 extracted references · 300 canonical work pages · 17 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The Science of the Einstein Telescope

    Abac, A., Abramo, R., Albanesi, S., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.12263, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2503.12263

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.12263

  2. [2]

    Observation of Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 2.5–4.5 M ⊙ Compact Object and a Neutron Star.Astrophys

    Abac, A. G., Abbott, R., Abouelfettouh, I., et al. 2024a, ApJL, 970, L34, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5beb

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5beb 2041

  3. [3]

    G., Abbott, R., Abe, H., et al

    Abac, A. G., Abbott, R., Abe, H., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 973, 132, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad65ce

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad65ce

  4. [4]

    GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run

    Abac, A. G., Abouelfettouh, I., Acernese, F., et al. 2025b, ApJL, 993, L25, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0c9c —. 2025c, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18082, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.18082 —. 2025d, PhRvL, 135, 111403, doi:10.1103/kw5g-d732 —. 2026a, PhRvL, 136, 041403, doi:10.1103/6c61-fm1n —. 2026b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.19019, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2603.19019 ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0c9c 2041

  5. [5]

    P., et al

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2016a, PhRvL, 116, 061102, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102 —. 2016b, PhRvL, 116, 221101, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.221101 —. 2016c, ApJL, 818, L22, doi:10.3847/2041-8205/818/2/L22 —. 2017, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 34, 044001, doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa51f4

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.061102 2041

  6. [6]

    Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific and Virgo], Phys

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abraham, S., et al. 2020, PhRvL, 125, 101102, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.101102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.101102 2020

  7. [7]

    D., Acernese, F., et al

    Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A84, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141452 —. 2023, Physical Review X, 13, 011048, doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.13.011048 —. 2024, PhRvD, 109, 022001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.022001

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141452 2022

  8. [8]

    2025, PhRvD, 112, 084080, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.112.084080

    Abbott, R., Abe, H., Acernese, F., et al. 2025, PhRvD, 112, 084080, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.112.084080

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.112.084080 2025

  9. [9]

    The Astrophysical Journal Letters , author =

    Agazie, G., Anumarlapudi, A., Archibald, A. M., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 951, L8, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 —. 2023b, ApJL, 952, L37, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace18b —. 2023c, ApJL, 951, L10, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acda88

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 2041

  10. [10]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 641, A1, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833880 22 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., Arroja, F., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 641, A1, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833880 22 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833880 2020

  11. [11]

    Physical Review D , author =

    Ajith, P., Babak, S., Chen, Y., et al. 2008, PhRvD, 77, 104017, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.104017 Akyüz, A., Correia, A., Garofalo, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08789, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2507.08789

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.104017 2008

  12. [12]

    Alves, L. M. B., Sullivan, A. G., Ji, X., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.13668, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2401.13668

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.13668 2024

  13. [13]

    Detecting Intermediate-Mass Ratio Inspirals From The Ground And Space

    Amaro-Seoane, P. 2018, PhRvD, 98, 063018, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.063018

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.063018 2018

  14. [14]

    Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Audley, H., Babak, S., et al. 2017, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1702.00786. https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.00786

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    Living Rev

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Andrews, J., Arca Sedda, M., et al. 2023, Living Reviews in Relativity, 26, 2, doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y Andrés-Carcasona, M., & Caneva Santoro, G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.01918, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2512.01918

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y 2023

  16. [16]

    Investigating the formation channel of GW231123: Population III stars or hierarchical mergers?

    Angeloni, F., Kritos, K., Schneider, R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.18709, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2604.18709

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.18709 2026

  17. [17]

    R., Baldassare, V

    Angus, C. R., Baldassare, V. F., Mockler, B., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1452, doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01811-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01811-y 2022

  18. [18]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 5008, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1149

    Antonini, F., Gieles, M., & Gualandris, A. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 5008, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1149

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1149 2019

  19. [19]

    Antonini, F., & Rasio, F. A. 2016, ApJ, 831, 187, doi:10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/187

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/2/187 2016

  20. [20]

    Antonini, F., Toonen, S., & Hamers, A. S. 2017, ApJ, 841, 77, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f5e Arca Sedda, M., Amaro Seoane, P., & Chen, X. 2021a, A&A, 652, A54, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037785 Arca Sedda, M., Askar, A., & Giersz, M. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 4652, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1859 —. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1905.00902, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1905.00902 Arca...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f5e 2017

  21. [21]

    J., & Natarajan, P

    Armitage, P. J., & Natarajan, P. 2005, ApJ, 634, 921, doi:10.1086/497108

    work page doi:10.1086/497108 2005

  22. [22]

    2015, PhRvD, 91, 084011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.084011

    Arvanitaki, A., Baryakhtar, M., & Huang, X. 2015, PhRvD, 91, 084011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.084011

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.084011 2015

  23. [23]

    2011, PhRvD, 83, 044026, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.044026 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Arvanitaki, A., & Dubovsky, S. 2011, PhRvD, 83, 044026, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.044026 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.83.044026 2011

  24. [24]

    S., East, W

    Aswathi, P. S., East, W. E., Siemonsen, N., Sun, L., & Jones, D. 2025, PhRvD, 112, 123048, doi:10.1103/n5hr-zljn

    work page doi:10.1103/n5hr-zljn 2025

  25. [25]

    J., Figueroa, D

    Auclair, P., Blanco-Pillado, J. J., Figueroa, D. G., et al. 2020, JCAP, 2020, 034, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/04/034 23 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/04/034 2020

  26. [26]

    2025, Living Reviews in Relativity, 28, 1, doi:10.1007/s41114-024-00053-w

    Bagui, E., Clesse, S., De Luca, V., et al. 2025, Living Reviews in Relativity, 28, 1, doi:10.1007/s41114-024-00053-w

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-024-00053-w 2025

  27. [27]

    2020, PhRvD, 101, 084053, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.084053

    Baibhav, V., Berti, E., & Cardoso, V. 2020, PhRvD, 101, 084053, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.084053

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.084053 2020

  28. [28]

    F., Reines, A

    Baldassare, V. F., Reines, A. E., Gallo, E., & Greene, J. E. 2015, ApJ, 809, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/809/1/L14

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/809/1/l14 2015

  29. [29]

    , keywords =

    Barausse, E. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 2533, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21057.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21057.x 2012

  30. [30]

    2000, ApJ, 531, 613, doi:10.1086/308503 —

    Barkana, R., & Loeb, A. 2000, ApJ, 531, 613, doi:10.1086/308503 —. 2001, PhR, 349, 125, doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00019-9

    work page doi:10.1086/308503 2000

  31. [31]

    S., Mezcua, M., & Comerford, J

    Barrows, R. S., Mezcua, M., & Comerford, J. M. 2019, ApJ, 882, 181, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab338a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab338a 2019

  32. [32]

    2018, The A+ Design Curve, Tech

    Barsotti, L., McCuller, L., Evans, M., & Fritschel, P. 2018, The A+ Design Curve, Tech. Rep. LIGO-T1800042-v5, LIGO Laboratory.https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1800042/public

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    2026, ApJL, 996, L44, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2bff

    Bartos, I., & Haiman, Z. 2026, ApJL, 996, L44, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2bff

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2bff 2026

  34. [34]

    E., et al

    Belczynski, K., Klencki, J., Fields, C. E., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A104, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936528

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936528 2020

  35. [35]

    Berti, E., Buonanno, A., & Will, C. M. 2005, PhRvD, 71, 084025, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.084025

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.084025 2005

  36. [36]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.05923, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.05923

    Berti, E., Branchesi, M., Buonanno, A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.05923, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.05923

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.05923 2026

  37. [37]

    2022, PhRvD, 105, 124063, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.124063

    Bhagwat, S., Pacilio, C., Barausse, E., & Pani, P. 2022, PhRvD, 105, 124063, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.124063

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.124063 2022

  38. [38]

    K., Blecha, L., Torrey, P., et al

    Bhowmick, A. K., Blecha, L., Torrey, P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.03626, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2402.03626 —. 2026, ApJ, 997, 187, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2607

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.03626 2024

  39. [39]

    Boekholt, T. C. N., Schleicher, D. R. G., Fellhauer, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 366, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty208

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty208 2018

  40. [40]

    2024, A&A, 690, A194, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348538

    Bollati, F., Lupi, A., Dotti, M., & Haardt, F. 2024, A&A, 690, A194, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348538

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348538 2024

  41. [41]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12325, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.12325

    Bonoli, S., Izquierdo-Villalba, D., Spinoso, D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12325, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.12325

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.12325 2025

  42. [42]

    L., Larson, S

    Breivik, K., Rodriguez, C. L., Larson, S. L., Kalogera, V., & Rasio, F. A. 2016, ApJL, 830, L18, doi:10.3847/2041-8205/830/1/L18

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/830/1/l18 2016

  43. [43]

    Gravitational wave searches for ultralight bosons with LIGO and LISA

    Brito, R., Ghosh, S., Barausse, E., et al. 2017, PhRvD, 96, 064050, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.064050

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.064050 2017

  44. [44]

    2018, MNRAS, 478, 3199, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1026

    Britzen, S., Fendt, C., Witzel, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 3199, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1026

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1026 2018

  45. [45]

    S., Berger, E., Stevenson, S., et al

    Broekgaarden, F. S., Berger, E., Stevenson, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 5737, doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1677

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1677 2022

  46. [46]

    2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi:10.1086/377529

    Bromm, V., & Loeb, A. 2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi:10.1086/377529

    work page doi:10.1086/377529 2003

  47. [47]

    2026, A&A, 707, A284, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557826 24 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    Bruce, J., Vesperini, E., Askar, A., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A284, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557826 24 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557826 2026

  48. [48]

    J., & Natarajan, P

    Burke, C. J., & Natarajan, P. 2026, Nature Astronomy, 10, 187, doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02759-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02759-5 2026

  49. [49]

    R., Simón, J., & Edwards, M

    Burke, O., Gair, J. R., Simón, J., & Edwards, M. C. 2020, PhRvD, 102, 124054, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.124054

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.124054 2020

  50. [50]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 4133, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2836 Cáceres-Burgos, P

    Bustamante, S., & Springel, V. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 4133, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2836 Cáceres-Burgos, P. F. V., Dayal, P., Lira, P., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A360, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556153 Cárdenas-Avendaño, A., & Sopuerta, C. F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.08085, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2401.08085

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2836 2019

  51. [51]

    2020, PhRvD, 101, 044047, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.044047

    Carson, Z., & Yagi, K. 2020, PhRvD, 101, 044047, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.044047

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.044047 2020

  52. [52]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.04593, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2512.04593

    Chandra, K., Gamba, R., & Chiaramello, D. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.04593, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2512.04593

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.04593 2025

  53. [53]

    Chang, J. N. Y., Dai, L., Pfister, H., Kar Chowdhury, R., & Natarajan, P. 2025, ApJL, 980, L22, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adace7

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adace7 2025

  54. [54]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 2145, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1838

    Charisi, M., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2145, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1838

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1838 2016

  55. [55]

    R., Runnoe, J., Bogdanovic, T., & Trump, J

    Charisi, M., Taylor, S. R., Runnoe, J., Bogdanovic, T., & Trump, J. R. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 5929, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3713

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3713 2022

  56. [56]

    2025, ApJL, 995, L6, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1a5f

    Chatterjee, C., McGowan, K., Deshmukh, S., Tyler-Howard, N., & Jani, K. 2025, ApJL, 995, L6, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1a5f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1a5f 2025

  57. [57]

    Chen, S., Jani, K., & Kephart, T. W. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.13621, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2601.13621

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.13621 2026

  58. [58]

    2017, ApJL, 842, L2, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa74ce

    Chen, X., & Amaro-Seoane, P. 2017, ApJL, 842, L2, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa74ce

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa74ce 2017

  59. [59]

    V., Katkov, I

    Chilingarian, I. V., Katkov, I. Y., Zolotukhin, I. Y., et al. 2018, ArXiv e-prints. https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.01467

    work page arXiv 2018

  60. [60]

    S., Narayan, R., Su, K.-Y., & Natarajan, P

    Cho, H., Prather, B. S., Narayan, R., Su, K.-Y., & Natarajan, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.17818, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2507.17818

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.17818 2025

  61. [61]

    S., Narayan, R., et al

    Cho, H., Prather, B. S., Narayan, R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.15560, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.15560

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.15560 2026

  62. [62]

    2018, ApJL, 858, L8, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aabf88

    Christian, P., Mocz, P., & Loeb, A. 2018, ApJL, 858, L8, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aabf88

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aabf88 2018

  63. [63]

    P., et al

    Creighton, T., Lognonné, P., Panning, M. P., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.18437

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    2026, MNRAS, 546, stag073, doi:10.1093/mnras/stag073

    Croon, D., Gerosa, D., & Sakstein, J. 2026, MNRAS, 546, stag073, doi:10.1093/mnras/stag073

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag073 2026

  65. [65]

    A., Christensen, N., & Sakellariadou, M

    Cuceu, I., Bizouard, M. A., Christensen, N., & Sakellariadou, M. 2026, PhRvD, 113, L021302, doi:10.1103/zd8m-tzxd

    work page doi:10.1103/zd8m-tzxd 2026

  66. [66]

    2019, BAAS, 51, 109, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1903.04069

    Cutler, C., Berti, E., Holley-Bockelmann, K., et al. 2019, BAAS, 51, 109, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1903.04069

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.04069 2019

  67. [67]

    2024, European Physical Journal C, 84, 1237, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13623-7 25 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    Das, D., Shashank, S., & Bambi, C. 2024, European Physical Journal C, 84, 1237, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13623-7 25 LILA Black Hole Binary Detection Landscape&Science CasesNguyenet al.2026

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13623-7 2024

  68. [68]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.09124, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.09124

    Das, M., Bulik, T., Roy, S., & Mukhopadhyay, B. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.09124, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.09124

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.09124 2026

  69. [69]

    G., & Sathyaprakash, B

    Datta, S., Gupta, A., Kastha, S., Arun, K. G., & Sathyaprakash, B. S. 2021, PhRvD, 103, 024036, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.024036

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.024036 2021

  70. [70]

    2013, MNRAS, 430, 1694, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts710

    Dauser, T., Garcia, J., Wilms, J., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 1694, doi:10.1093/mnras/sts710

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts710 2013

  71. [71]

    Gravitational Waves from the Cosmic Dawn: Tracing Cosmic Black Hole Binaries with ET, LGWA and LISA

    Davari, N., Valiante, R., Trinca, A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.18173. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18173

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  72. [72]

    GW231123: A Possible Primordial Black Hole Origin

    Dayal, P., Rossi, E. M., Shiralilou, B., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 2336, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz897 De Luca, V., Franciolini, G., & Riotto, A. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.09965, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.09965 De Rosa, A., Vignali, C., Bogdanović, T., et al. 2019, NewAR, 86, 101525, doi:10.1016/j.newar.2020.101525

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stz897 2019

  73. [73]

    E., et al

    Delfavero, V., Ray, S., Cook, H. E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.13412, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.13412

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.13412 2025

  74. [74]

    E., Hall, P

    Dewdney, P. E., Hall, P. J., Schilizzi, R. T., & Lazio, T. J. L. W. 2009, IEEE Proceedings, 97, 1482, doi:10.1109/JPROC.2009.2021005 Di Carlo, U. N., Mapelli, M., Pasquato, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5132, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2390 Di Matteo, T., Khandai, N., DeGraf, C., et al. 2012, ApJL, 745, L29, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/745/2/L29 Di Matteo, T., Ni, Y....

    work page doi:10.1109/jproc.2009.2021005 2009

  75. [75]

    2017, ApJ, 840, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6b58

    Dosopoulou, F., & Antonini, F. 2017, ApJ, 840, 31, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6b58

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6b58 2017

  76. [76]

    2014, MNRAS, 440, 1590, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu373

    Dubois, Y., Volonteri, M., & Silk, J. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 1590, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu373

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu373 2014

  77. [77]

    C., D’Orazio, D., Derdzinski, A., et al

    Duffell, P. C., D’Orazio, D., Derdzinski, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 25, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abab95

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abab95 2020

  78. [78]

    2024a, PhRvD, 109, L021302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.L021302 —

    Ellis, J., Fairbairn, M., Hütsi, G., et al. 2024a, PhRvD, 109, L021302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.L021302 —. 2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.19650, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.19650

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.l021302

  79. [79]

    2007, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 117, 241, doi:10.1143/PTP.117.241

    Enoki, M., & Nagashima, M. 2007, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 117, 241, doi:10.1143/PTP.117.241

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.117.241 2007

  80. [80]

    E., Blecha, L., & Bhowmick, A

    Evans, A. E., Blecha, L., & Bhowmick, A. K. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 2783, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2735

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2735 2025

Showing first 80 references.